On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 11:06 AM, Greg Bernstein <[email protected]
> wrote:

> Thanks for the detailed references Jan.  I've looked at the Yang network
> topo draft and the OpenDaylight JSON format. This is very similar to
> what we'd want. Though there are some more items that we'd like
> included.  If there is sufficient interest we can put an extended
> comparison of models and JSON formats into a draft.
>

A comparison of models and JSON formats can be a great starting point. It
will inform the WG what has already been done, and at the same time shows
that there is a base.

Richard


>
> Cheers
>
> Greg
> On 1/31/2014 2:48 PM, Jan Medved (jmedved) wrote:
> > Network topology as a list of nodes and links is defined in
> > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-clemm-netmod-yang-network-topo/.
> > This draft is implemented in the OpenDaylight controller as a part of the
> > Hydrogen Service Provider edition. OpenDaylight supports RESTconf v02
> > (http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-bierman-netconf-restconf) on its
> NB
> > interface and can provide data (including topology graphs) to clients in
> > both XML and JSON formats. OpenDaylight is open sourced under EPL.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > /Jan
> >
> >
> > On 1/31/14, 12:57 PM, "Greg Bernstein" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Vijay, see comments below.
> >> Cheers
> >> Greg
> >> On 1/29/2014 3:04 PM, Vijay K. Gurbani wrote:
> >>> Michael, Greg: Great dialogue.
> >>>
> >>> I think as a general deliverable for "An ALTO format for encoding
> >>> graphs", this dialogue has shed some clarity on what could be the
> >>> outcome of such a deliverable.  The scope of what goes into encoding
> >>> the graph would be something that we should discuss as well.
> >>>
> >>> It appears that normal attributes associated with graph representation
> >>> are in scope, and these include labels for vertices and edges,
> in-degree
> >>> and out-degree for vertices, the pair of vertices an edge connects,
> >>> and a set of properties associated with edges and vertices.  (This is
> >>> essentially the "property graph" model you outline in [1].)
> >>>
> >>> I'd like to see what the thoughts are of you (and the working group)
> >>> on whether we end up using an existing format (and how that will
> >>> actually work with respect to the copyright holders, if any, of the
> >>> existing format) or do we come up with a new one?
> >> --> NetworkX originated with a government research project is is open
> >> sourced under BSD
> >> (
> http://networkx.github.io/documentation/latest/overview.html#free-softwar
> >> e).
> >> Hard to exactly say what the Tinkerpop open source license is
> >> (https://github.com/tinkerpop/blueprints). However, neither of these is
> >> formally defined at a sufficient level for standardization purposes,
> >> i.e., not even close to the JSON standardized in the current ALTO spec.
> >> As Michael pointed out the structure of a graph in JSON via node lists
> >> and link lists with properties is a fairly generic notion. We'd need to
> >> formalize it for interoperability sake. Note also that representing
> >> paths as a list of links (link-path representation) is also fairly
> >> generic.
> >>> Another question to consider is whether this new format will subsume
> >>> the existing topology map and cost map as well?  Or does this new
> >>> format only model individual hosts and the links connecting them
> >>> and stays away from representing the hosts in the aggregate (the PID
> >>> concept)?  Usages of ALTO that will benefit from existing concepts
> >>> (PIDs, pairwise costs) can continue to use the existing topologies and
> >>> cost maps.  Usages of ALTO that need more detailed knowledge of
> >>> individual hosts and link can use the new extension format for encoding
> >>> graphs.
> >> --> Not sure if this is possible. Was having related discussions with
> >> Wendy and Richard, they may have more ideas on this.
> >>> Regarding the second sub-issue on the need for reductionist algebra for
> >>> graph transformations, I agree with you [1] that we leave that up to
> the
> >>> ALTO client.  I believe that such a strategy will allow Greg to derive
> >>> "service-specific" graphs that are transformed from an original graph.
> >>> Since the specific need for such "service-specific" graphs will be a
> >>> function of what the ALTO client wants, it seems reasonable to provide
> >>> building blocks in the form of an extension for encoding graphs that
> >>> can be coupled with the extensions for TE metrics
> >>> (draft-wu-alto-te-metrics).  It is up to the ALTO client to put these
> >>> together in some fashion that satisfies its constraints.
> >> --> Either the client or the server but not part of the standard. How a
> >> network provider wants to represent
> >> their network to a client is their business.  In the case of controlled
> >> environments (VPN) the provider may
> >> customize what they show to a particular client (based on pre-arranged
> >> information that is out of our scope).
> >>> This will leave us with a reasonable and tractable problem to come up
> >>> with an extension to encode graphs, hopefully in a short time frame.
> >>>
> >>> [1] http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/alto/current/msg02365.html
> >>>
> >>> Looking forward to your responses and insights.
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>>
> >>> - vijay
> >>
> >> --
> >> ===================================================
> >> Dr Greg Bernstein, Grotto Networking (510) 573-2237
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> alto mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> ===================================================
> Dr Greg Bernstein, Grotto Networking (510) 573-2237
>
> _______________________________________________
> alto mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
>



-- 
-- 
 =====================================
| Y. Richard Yang <[email protected]>   |
| Professor of Computer Science       |
| http://www.cs.yale.edu/~yry/        |
 =====================================
_______________________________________________
alto mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto

Reply via email to